Utopia Talk / Politics / Why public transportation wont work

xyz1 Member	Wed Nov 04 08:11:51 SEPTA (the Philadelphia public transportation provider) union workers went on strike out of pure greed. Apparently they were pissed off that the city was ONLY offering guaranteed salary raises of a couple percentage points over five years during a recession. Commuters are screwed now. Just think what would happen if we tried to make public transportation THE primary source of transportation like our citizens. Just think of how devastating a strike by greedy unions like this one would be. Millions of employees unable to get to work, millions of people unable to do chores, etc. Idiots like these are the reason I am in favor of every person buying a car.
ehcks Member	Wed Nov 04 08:15:01 Public transportation doesn't require a union.
Sarcasm Member	Wed Nov 04 08:28:35 Funny how Europe manages to have even stronger unions and fully functioning public transport.
xyz1 Member	Wed Nov 04 08:34:45 Sarcasm, funny you should mention that. ---- Strike disrupts French transport In the past, strikes have put great pressure on political leaders Workers in France have begun a strike which has severely disrupted the country's transport system, especially the railway network. The 24-hour strike began on Wednesday at 2000 local time (1800 GMT). Trade unions called the strike in protest against the reform of special pension schemes enjoyed by a minority of state sector workers. In the past, transport strikes have caused massive disruption and put pressure on political leaders. Soon after the strike started the national railway company SNCF reported many cancellations of its high-speed TGV trains, out of which only about 7% are expected to be in normal service. Eurostar cross-channel trains will also be affected, but SNCF said only five trains would be suspended between Paris and London. Transport links in the Paris region are also severely disrupted, with the public transport company RATP reporting very little traffic on the metro lines, virtually no traffic on the regional trains and only 15% of buses and trams in normal service. The strike is scheduled to last 24 hours, but some unions have called for strikes to be extended to Friday or even Saturday. An extension of the strike could hit spectators heading for the final matches of the Rugby World Cup, held at the Stade de France stadium in a northern suburb of Paris. 'Special regime' President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose proposed pension reforms were invoked by the trade unions as the main reason for this strike, said he was not impressed. Mr Sarkozy promised to maintain a dialogue with unions "I am not stressed. People would be more worried if we didn't make reforms," Mr Sarkozy told France 2 television. "There are reforms to be made, everybody knows this. I was elected for that, we are going to make them calmly, maintaining the dialogue. "I'll meet the railway workers, the RATP agents, the gas workers, the electricians, as I did last week," he said. The government plans to scrap the "special regime" pension system for 500,000 workers in state-controlled companies. It includes workers at SNCF, electricity company EDF, miners and members of parliament. Only 6% of pensions fall under the special regime, which allows beneficiaries to retire after 37.5 years worked, compared with 40 years for other public and private sector employees. The government says the cost to the budget of the special regime will be 5bn euros (£3.48bn) this year. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7049102.stm
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 08:47:31 xyz1: There is a toss up it is true. This is not a new phenomenon. London has the largest, densest public transport network in the world IIRC, so makes a good model. Buses are fine, but every year the underground railway workers strike much in the way you describe. The difference in bargaining power is due to the higher requirements between being a bus driver and being a train driver (actually, higher percieved requirements: often the unions strike over anything that undermines that perception, such as forcing drivers to work on different lines, claiming specialist training is required for each line in case they miss a signal... kind of like a bus driver insisting he be trained for every route less he jump a red light). Nonetheless, despite the highway robbery, public transport provides enormous economic benefit. This is precisely why the strikes are so damaging. However, there is a route to a strike free future: metro systems can be near fully automated. The problem is with existing systems, any attempt to try and automate, a long and costly programme, is met with immediate striking in the sort and medium term. However, new systems can be built automated from the get-go.
Sarcasm Member	Wed Nov 04 09:23:23 "xyz1 Member Wed Nov 04 08:34:45 Sarcasm, funny you should mention that. ---- Strike disrupts French transport" We have strikes and we also have a fully functioning public service (in most parts of modern Europe). This is simply fact.
Sarcasm Member	Wed Nov 04 09:24:43 Also, we should probably add that the UK has amongst the shittiest PT in Europe and the French are in love with strikes, locking managers in their offices and pelting them with eggs and beheading their leaders.
Aeros Member	Wed Nov 04 09:39:17 When I lived in the middle of nowhere Germany, the Village I was located at had a bus that ran every hour to the Bahnhof. At the Bahnhof, I could hop the local commuter train to the Hauptbahnhof a few miles down the rails. From the Hauptbahnhof I could go anywhere in Europe, or, if I went to the train station at Frankfurt Airport, anywhere in the world. I did not not need a car. For anything. That is public transport, and yes, it works really really good.
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 09:53:56 Sarcasm: I disagree. France has excellent intercity trains, but by and large my experience in France and other parts of Europe is that it is generally speaking harder to get around locally compared to the UK bus networks. UK bus coverage is generally a lot better in terms of frequency and range, the only bit of the UK public transport that truly sucks is intercity trains.
licker Sports Mod	Wed Nov 04 10:00:12 If you are happy to accept strikes disrupting your ability to travel several times a year then sure, the French model (and apparently other european models are fine, but I can only comment personally on the French model). Point being there is a cultural difference between the US and Europe on tolerance towards striking and need/desire for vehicular freedom. Of course public transport in the western US would never work anyway, and probably true for alot of the midwest as well. On the eastern seaboard, especially the northeast it is more practical, and indeed, more used.
The Powers That Be Member	Wed Nov 04 10:07:30 I encountered traffic this morning related to this on 276. They said the traffic on 76 was one enormous line for miles into center city. And on top of that, there was a train fire on the R5 line that left hundreds of people stranded. Complete craziness.
The Powers That Be Member	Wed Nov 04 10:08:32 The traffic in the Philadelphia area is atrocious on any typical day, but Septa strikes always make it 1000 times worse.
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 10:21:47 licker: You know public transport isn't "instead" of cars? Striking is a pain in the arse, but it is really a separate issue. Intercity rail public transport for intercity could work on both seaboards, distance between cities is comparable to the European networks. The problem with existing US train networks is, as far as I can see, because they are doing it wrong. Insufficient or inadequate dedicated high speed lines combined with too many local stops. On the "high speed" lines in the US the trains barely average speeds of 80mph according to stats I read last year. Optimal way of doing it is a fast inter city trains connecting to the centre of each city, average distance between stops should be in excess of 60 miles, preferably over 100, combined with local bus networks in each city.
Sam Adams Member	Wed Nov 04 10:26:54 we have been over this. The population density in the US is too small for trains except in a few large cities.
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 10:47:29 Sam Adams: You were wrong then too. Intercity is not the same as light urban railways. City size, economic activity and relative distance are entirely compatible with European intercity trains.
Sam Adams Member	Wed Nov 04 10:50:57 only in one spot.... Boston-DC, which also hits NYC, PHL, and BWI. every other route in the US favors airplanes
MrBBonz Member	Wed Nov 04 10:54:25 People in the US enjoy being able to take their car wherever they want, whenever they want. There are benefits to both systems, but a country sized system wouldnt work in the US. And I would bet that most cities already have a decent enough system.
Buzz Lightyear Member	Wed Nov 04 10:55:45 Public transport From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Public transit) Jump to: navigation, search "Mass transit" redirects here. For other uses, see Mass transit (disambiguation). Intercity-Express high-speed train, Germany Coach Canada intercity coach, Toronto, Canada Tram, Grenoble, France Trolleybus, Landskrona, Sweden QuayLink hybrid city bus, Tyne and Wear, England Community bus, Oyama, Tochigi, Japan Public transport (also public transportation, public transit, or mass transit) comprises passenger transportation services which are available for use by the general public, as opposed to modes for private use such as automobiles or vehicles for hire. Public transport services are usually funded by fares charged to each passenger, with varying levels of subsidy from local or national tax revenue; fully-subsidised, zero-fare services operate in some towns and cities. Public transport can consist of subways, trolleys and light rail, commuter trains, buses, van pool services, paratransit services for senior citizens and people with disabilities, ferries, water taxis, or monorails.[1] Public transport is provided by a company or authority that operates a fleet of vehicles. They may or may not be regulated or subsidized by authorities. The infrastructure used may be exclusive, or shared with private vehicles. For historical and economic reasons, there are differences internationally regarding use and extension of public transport. While countries in Old World tend to have extensive and frequent systems serving their old and dense cities, most cities of the New World have more sprawl and much less comprehensive public transport. Contents [hide] * 1 Impact o 1.1 Environmental o 1.2 Area o 1.3 Social o 1.4 Economic * 2 Mode o 2.1 Road o 2.2 Rail + 2.2.1 Tram + 2.2.2 Rapid transit + 2.2.3 Heavy rail + 2.2.4 High-speed o 2.3 Water o 2.4 Air o 2.5 Interchanges * 3 History * 4 Service o 4.1 Urban o 4.2 Inter-city o 4.3 Class o 4.4 Sleeping * 5 Operation o 5.1 Schedules o 5.2 Infrastructure o 5.3 Financing + 5.3.1 Fare and ticketing + 5.3.2 Subsidies o 5.4 Safety and security o 5.5 Regulations + 5.5.1 Food and drink + 5.5.2 Smoking + 5.5.3 Noise + 5.5.4 Banned items + 5.5.5 Other regulations * 6 See also * 7 References o 7.1 Notes o 7.2 Bibliography * 8 External links [edit] Impact [edit] Environmental A 2002 study by the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise Institute found that public transportation in the U.S uses approximately half the fuel required by cars, SUV's and light trucks. In addition, the study noted that "private vehicles emit about 95 percent more carbon monoxide, 92 percent more volatile organic compounds and about twice as much carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide than public vehicles for every passenger mile traveled".[2] A 2004 study from Lancaster University concluded that there was no environmental benefit to be gained from persuading car or plane travellers to switch to diesel-powered UK trains.[3] The study showed that trains had failed to keep up with the advances that the automotive and aviation industries had made in improved fuel efficiency. Express trains travelling from London to Edinburgh consumed 11.5 litres more fuel per seat than a modern diesel car. A representitive from Modern Railways magazine said[citation needed]: Studies have shown that there is a strong inverse correlation between urban population density and energy consumption per capita, and that public transport could play a key role in increasing urban population densities, and thus reduce travel distances and fossil fuel consumption.[4] [edit] Area Traffic jam, São Paulo, Brazil Public transport infrastructure is considerably more dense than that of private transport, allowing cities to be built more compactly than if they were dependent on automobile transport. If public transport planning is at the core of urban planning, it will also force cities to be built more compactly to create efficient feeds into the stations and stops of transport.[citation needed] This will at the same time allow the creation of centers around the hubs, serving passengers' need for their daily commercial needs and public services. This approach significantly reduces sprawl. Wiki letter w.svg Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page. (November 2008) [edit] Social An important social role played by public transport is to ensure that all members of society are able to travel, not just those with a driving license and access to an automobileâ??which include groups such as the young, the old, the poor, those with medical conditions, and people banned from driving. Automobile dependency is a name given by policy makers to places where the those without access to a private vehicle do not have access to independent mobility.[5] Above that, public transportation opens to its users the possibility of meeting other people, as no concentration is diverted from interacting with fellow-travelers due to any steering activities. Adding to the above-said, public transport becomes a location of inter-social encounters across all boundaries of social, ethnic and other types of affiliation. [edit] Economic Public transport allows transport at an economy of scale not available through private transport. Through stimulating public transport it is possible to reduce the total transport cost for the public. Time costs can also be reduced as cars removed from the road through public transit options translate to less congestion and faster speeds for remaining motorists. Transit-oriented development can both improve the usefulness and efficiency of the public transit system as well as result in increased business for commercial developments. Investment in public transport also stimulates the economy locally, with between $4 and $9 of economic activity resulting from every dollar spent.[1] Well-designed transit systems can have a positive effect on real estate prices. The Hong Kong metro MTR generates a profit by redeveloping land around its stations. Much public opposition to new transit construction can be based on the concern about the impact on neighborhoods of this new economic development. Few localities have the ability to seize and reassign development rights to a private transit operator, as Hong Kong has done. Increased land desirability has resulted around stations in places such as Washington, D.C.. Several websites have been founded, notably Hopstop.com, that give directions through mass transit systems. Conversely, the existence of a transit system can lower land values, either through perceived influence on a region's demographics and crime rate or simply through ambient noise the system creates. [edit] Mode [edit] Road Main article: Bus Local bus of Canberra which is powered by compressed natural gas A bus is a road vehicle capable of carrying numerous passengers. Buses operate with low capacity, and can operate on conventional roads, with relatively inexpensive bus stops to serve passengers. Therefore buses are commonly used in smaller cities and towns, in rural areas as well for shuttle services supplementing in large cities. Coaches are buses used for long distance services. They have higher standard, but a limited stopping pattern. Bus rapid transit is an ambiguous term used for buses operating on dedicated right-of-way, much like a light rail. Trolleybuses use overhead wires to get electric power for traction. [edit] Rail Main article: Passenger rail transport Passenger rail transport is the conveyance of passengers by means of wheeled vehicles specially designed to run along railways. Trains allow high capacity on short or long distance, but require track infrastructure and stations to be built. Urban rail transit consists of trams, light rail, rapid transit, people movers, commuter rail and funiculars. [edit] Tram Main articles: Tram and Light rail Trams are railborne vehicles that run in city streets or dedicated tracks. They have higher capacity than buses, but must follow dedicated infrastructure with rails and wires either above or below the track, limiting their flexibility. Light rail is a modern development of the tram, with dedicated right-of-way not shared with other traffic, step-free access and increased speed. [edit] Rapid transit Main article: Rapid transit A rapid transit system is an electric passenger railway in an urban area with high capacity and frequency, and grade separation from other traffic.[6][7] Rapid transit systems are typically either in tunnels or elevated above street level. Outside urban centres rapid transit lines sometimes run grade separated at ground level. Service on rapid transit systems is provided on designated lines between stations using electric multiple units on rails, although some systems use magnetic levitation[8] or monorails. Rapid transit is faster and has a higher capacity than trams or light rail, but is not as fast or as far-reaching as commuter rail. It is unchallenged in its ability to transport large amounts of people quickly over short distances with little land use. Variations of rapid transit include people movers, small-scale light metro and the commuter rail hybrid S-Bahn. The first rapid transit system was the London Underground, which opened in 1863.[9] The technology quickly spread to other cities in Europe and then to the United States, where a number of elevated systems were built. Since then the largest growth has been in Asia and with driverless systems.[10] More than 160 cities have rapid transit systems, totalling more than 8,000 km (4,971 mi) of track and 7,000 stations. Twenty-five cities have systems under construction. [edit] Heavy rail Commuter rail is part of an urban area's public transport; it provides faster services to outer suburbs and neighboring towns and villages. Trains stop at all stations, that are located to serve a smaller suburban or town center. The stations often being combined with shuttle bus or park and ride systems at each station. Frequency may be up to several times per hour, and commuter rail systems may either be part of the national railway, or operated by local transit agencies. Intercity rail is long-haul passenger services that connect multiple urban areas. They have few stops, and aim at high average speeds, typically only making one of a few stops per city. These services may also be international. [edit] High-speed Main article: High-speed rail High-speed rail is passenger trains operating significantly faster than conventional railâ??typically defined as at least 200 kilometres per hour (120 mph). The most predominant systems have been built in Europe and Japan, and offer long-distance rail journeys as quick as air travel. [edit] Water Main article: Ferry Metro Transit ferry, Halifax, Canada A ferry is a boat or ship, used to carry (or ferry) passengers, and sometimes their vehicles, across a body of water. A foot-passenger ferry with many stops is sometimes called a water bus. Ferries form a part of the public transport systems of many waterside cities and islands, allowing direct transit between points at a capital cost much lower than bridges or tunnels, though at a lower speed. Ship connections of much larger distances (such as over long distances in water bodies like the Mediterranean Sea) may also be called ferry services. [edit] Air Main article: Airline Main article: Bush_airplane An airline provides scheduled serves with aircraft between airports. Air travel has high up to very high speeds, but incurs large waiting times prior and after travel, and is therefore only feasible over longer distances or in areas where lack of ground infrastructure makes other modes of transport impossible. Bush airlines work more similar to bus stops; an aircraft waits for passengers and takes off when the aircraft is full. [edit] Interchanges Main articles: Transport hub and Intermodal passenger transport Early trolley car in Newton, Massachusetts. Interchanges are locations where passengers can switch mode. Most interchanges are predominantly for passenger to change from being pedestrians to passengers (such as a bus stop), while each system will have a few hubs that allow passengers to change between vehicles. This may be between vehicles of the same mode (like a bus interchange), or it can be between local and intercity transport (such as at a central station). [edit] History Conveyances for public hire are as old as the first ferries, and the earliest public transport was water transport: on land people walked or rode an animal. This form of transport is part of Greek mythology â?? corpses in ancient Greece were buried with a coin underneath their tongue to pay the ferryman Charon to take them to Hades. Some historical forms of public transport are the stagecoach, traveling a fixed route from inn to inn, and the horse-drawn boat carrying paying passengers, which was a feature of canals from their 17th-century origins. The omnibus, the first organized public transit system within a city, appears to have originated in Nantes, France, in 1826 and was introduced to London in July 1829.[11] [edit] Service [edit] Urban Urban transport is dominated by people making many short trips multiple times per day; this creates focus on headway and ease of use. [edit] Inter-city Intercity transport between cities is dominated by rail, coaches and airlines. Long journeys give air travel a large time advantage over all other modes of transport. On distances up to 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) high-speed rail can compete time wise with airlines, while conventional rail and coaches only can offer time-competitive services on shorter distances. Comfort is a much more important part of long-haul than short-haul transport. Using interconnected public transit lines to travel from city to city is called megaloping. [edit] Class Main article: Travel class A travel class is a quality of accommodation on public transport. Higher travel classes are more comfortable and more expensive. Not all modes and operators offer class differentiation. [edit] Sleeping In the era when long distance trips took several days, sleeping accommodations were an essential part of transportation. Today, most airlines, inter-city trains and coaches offer reclining seats and many provide pillows and blankets for overnight travelers. Better sleeping arrangements are commonly offered for a premium fare and include sleeping cars on overnight trains, larger private cabins on ships and airplane seats that convert into beds. Budget-conscious tourists sometimes plan their trips using overnight train or bus trips in lieu of paying for a hotel. The ability to get additional sleep on the way to work is attractive to many commuters using public transport. Because night trains or coaches can be cheaper than motels, homeless persons often use these as overnight shelters, as with the famous Line 22 ("Hotel 22") in Silicon Valley.[12][13] Specifically, a local transit route with a long overnight segment and which accepts inexpensive multi-use passes will acquire a reputation as a "moving hotel" for people with limited funds. Most transportation agencies actively discourage this. For this and other reasons passengers are often required to exit the vehicle at the end of the line; they can board again in the same or another vehicle, after some waiting. Also, even a low fare often deters the poorest individuals, including homeless people. [edit] Operation [edit] Schedules Main article: Public transport timetable All public transport must either operate after a predefined schedule, or operate at a sufficient frequency that travelers do not need to use a schedule to correspond with the services. Operators will publish timetables, often supplemented with maps and fare schemes to help travelers coordinate their travel. Public transport route planner online, sometimes combined with pre-sold tickets, help make planning task more user-friendly. To further aid travelers, operators often run at fixed times of the hour, so passengers only need to memorize the minutes past the hour the service leaves, and can apply that to any hour of the day. Coordination between services at intersections is important to reduce the total travel time for passengers. This can be done by coordinating shuttle services with main routes, or by creating a fixed time (for instance twice per hour) when all bus and rail routes meet at a station and exchange passengers. [edit] Infrastructure All public transport runs on infrastructure, either on roads, rail, airways or seaways; all consists of interchanges and way. The infrastructure can be shared with other modes of transport, freight and private transport, or it can be dedicated to public transport. The latter is especially true in cases where there are capacity problems for private transport. Investments in infrastructure are high, and make up a substantial part of the total costs in systems that are expanding. Once built, the infrastructure will further require operating and maintenance costs, adding to the total costs of public transport. Sometimes governments subsidize infrastructure by providing it free of charge, just like is common with roads for automobiles. [edit] Financing The main sources of financing are ticket revenue, government subsidies and advertisement. The percentage of revenue from passenger charges is known as the farebox recovery ratio. A limited amount of income may come from land development and rental income from stores and vendors, parking fees, and leasing tunnels and rights-of-way to carry fiber optic communication lines. [edit] Fare and ticketing Main article: Fare A contactless ticket validator used in Oslo, Norway Mostâ??but not allâ??public transport required the purchase of a ticket to generate revenue for the operators. Tickets may either be bought in advance, at the time of the ride, or the carrier may allow both methods. Passengers may be issued with a paper ticket, metal or plastic token, or an electronic card. Tickets may be valid for a single (or return) trip, or valid within a certain area for a period of time. The fare is based on the travel class, either as a function of the traveled distance, or based on a zone pricing. The tickets may have to be shown or checked automatically at the station platform or when boarding, or during the ride by a conductor. Operators may choose to control all riders, allowing sale of the ticket at the time of ride. Alternatively, a proof-of-payment system allows riders to enter the vehicles without showing the ticket, but riders may or may not be controlled by a ticket controller; if the rider fails to show proof of payment, the operator may fine the rider at the magnitude of the fare. Multi-use tickets allow travel more than once. In addition to return tickets, this includes period cards allowing travel within a certain area (for instance month cards), or during a given number of days that can be chosen within a longer period of time (for instance eight days within a month). Passes aimed at tourists, allowing free or discounted entry at many tourist attractions, typically include zero-fare public transport within the city. Period tickets may be for a particular route (in both directions), or for a whole network. A free travel pass allowing free and unlimited travel within a system is sometimes granted to particular social sectors, for example students, elderly, children, employees (job ticket) and the physical or mentally disabled. Zero-fare public transport services are funded in full by means other than collecting a fare from passengers, normally through heavy subsidy or commercial sponsorship by businesses. Several mid-size European cities and many smaller towns around the world have converted their entire bus networks to zero-fare. Local zero-fare shuttles or inner-city loops are far more common than city-wide systems. [edit] Subsidies Main article: Subsidy Ambox content.png This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (December 2008) Both local and national government may opt to subsidize public transport, of social, environmental or economical reasons. Key motivations are the need to provide transport to people those who cannot afford or are physically or legally incapable of using an automobile,[14] and to reduce congestion, land use and emissions of local air pollution and greenhouse gases. Other motives may be related to promote business and economic growth, or urban renewal in formerly deprived areas of the city. Some systems are owned and operated by a government agency; other transportation services may be commercial, but receive greater benefits from the government compared to a normal company. Subsidies may take the form of direct payments to unprofitable services, but also indirect subsidies are used. This may include allowing use of state-owned infrastructure without payment or for less than cost-price (may apply for railways and roads), to stimulate public transport's economic competitiveness over private transport, that normally also has free infrastructure. Other subsidies include tax advantages (for instance aviation fuel is typically not taxed), bailouts if companies that are likely to collapse (often applied to airlines) and reduction of competition through licensing schemes (often applied to taxis and airlines). Private transport is normally subsidized indirectly through free roads and infrastructure. Land development schemes may be initialized, where operators are given the rights to use lands near stations, depots, or tracks for property development. For instance, in Hong Kong, MTR Corporation Limited and KCR Corporation generate profits from land development to cover the partial cost of construction, but not operation, of the urban rail systems. Some government officials believe that use of taxpayer capital to fund mass transit will ultimately save taxpayer money in other ways, and therefore, state-funded mass transit is a benefit to the taxpayer. Since lack of mass transit results in more traffic, pollution, and road construction to accommodate more vehicles, all costly to taxpayers, providing mass transit will therefore alleviate these costs. [edit] Safety and security Main article: Public transport security On particular transit systems or parts of particular transit systems, some avoid patronizing public transportation out of fear for personal safety.[15] Despite the occasional highly publicized incident, the vast majority of modern public transport systems are well designed and patrolled and generally have low crime rates. Many systems are monitored by CCTV, mirrors, or patrol.[16] Nevertheless, some systems attract vagrants who use the stations or trains as sleeping shelters, though most operators have practices that discourage this.[16] Though public transit accidents attract far more publicity than car wrecks, public transport is much safer, due to far lower accident rates. Annually, public transit prevents 200,000 deaths, injuries, and accidents had equivalent trips been made by car. The National Safety Council estimates riding the bus as over 170 times safer than private car.[17] [edit] Regulations Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus in Mumbai, India [edit] Food and drink Longer distance public transport sometimes sell food and drink on board, and/or have a dedicated buffet car and/or dining car. However, some urban transport systems forbid the consumption of food, drink, or even chewing gum when riding on public transport. Sometimes only types of food are forbidden with more risk of making the vehicles dirty, e.g. ice creams and French fries, and sometimes potato chips.[citation needed] Some systems prohibit carrying open food or beverage containers, even if the food or beverage is not being consumed during the ride. [edit] Smoking In the United States, Canada, most of the European Union, Australia, and New Zealand, smoking is prohibited in all or some parts of most public transportation systems due to safety and health issues. Generally smoking is not allowed on buses and trains, while rules concerning stations and waiting platforms differ from system to system. The situation in other countries varies widely. [edit] Noise Many mass transit systems prohibit the use of audio devices, such as radios, CD players, and MP3 players unless used with an earphone through which only the user can hear the device. Some mass transit systems have restricted the use of mobile phones. The Amtrak system has "quiet cars" where mobile phone usage is prohibited. Some systems prohibit passengers from engaging in conversation with the operator. Others require that passengers who engage in any conversation must keep the noise level low enough that it not be audible to other passengers. Some systems have regulations on the use of profanity. In the United States, this has been challenge as a free speech issue. [edit] Banned items Certain items considered to be problematic are prohibited or regulated on many mass transit systems. These include firearms and other weapons (unless licensed to carry), explosives, flammable items, or hazardous chemicals and substances. Many systems prohibit live animals, but allow those that are in carrying cases or other closed containers. Additionally, service animals for the blind or disabled are permitted. Some systems prohibit items of a large size that may take up a lot of space, such as bicycles. But more systems in recent years have been permitting passengers to bring bikes. [edit] Other regulations Many systems have regulations against behavior deemed to be unruly or otherwise disturbing to other passengers. In such cases, it is usually at the discretion of the operator, police officers, or other transit employees to determine what behaviors fit this description. Some systems have regulations against photography or videography of the system's vehicles, stations, or other property. Those seen holding a mobile phone in a manner consistent with photography are considered to be suspicious for breaking this rule. [edit] See also Transport portal Sustainable development portal * Bus stop * Bus station * International Union of Public Transport * Mass transit in the United States * Public transport bus service * Public transport route planner * Public transport timetable * Railroad police * Train station * Transit police * Transport in present-day nations and states * WiFi [edit] References [edit] Notes 1. ^ a b http://www.publictransportation.org/aboutus/default.asp 2. ^ Lyndsey Layton, "Study Lists Mass Transit Benefits", The Washington Post, July 17, 2002, Page B05 3. ^ Paul Marston (2004-06-21). "Cars are more fuel-efficient than trains, claims study". The Daily Telegraph (Telegraph Media Group). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1465041/Cars-are-more-fuel-efficient-than-trains-claims-study.html. Retrieved 2009-03-18. 4. ^ Newman, 1999 5. ^ Litman, T. (1999). The Costs of Automobile Dependency and the Benefits of Balanced Transport. Victoria Public Policy Institute. 6. ^ "Rapid transit". Merriam-Webster. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rapid%20transit. Retrieved 2008-02-27. ; "Metro". International Association of Public Transport. http://www.uitp.org/Public-Transport/metro/index.cfm. Retrieved 2008-02-27. 7. ^ "Glossary of Transit Terminology". American Public Transportation Association. http://www.apta.com/research/info/online/glossary.cfm. Retrieved 2008-02-27. 8. ^ Vuchic, Vukan and Casello, Jeffrey (2002). "An Evaluation of Maglev Technology and Its Comparison With High Speed Rail" (PDF). Transportation Quarterly 56 (2): 33â??49. http://thetransitcoalition.us/LargePDFfiles/maglev-EvalandComparisonHSR.pdf. 9. ^ "London, England, United Kingdom". National Geographic. http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/places/cities/city_london.html. Retrieved 2006-10-13. 10. ^ Ovenden, 2007: 7 11. ^ The London Omnibus 12. ^ Jane Lii, "Refuge On The Road: Homeless Find Nighttime Haven â?? The No. 22 Bus From Menlo Park To San Jose", San Jose Mercury News, 9 January 2000, 1A. 13. ^ Cathy Newman, "Silicon Valley: Inside the Dream Incubator", National Geographic 200, no. 6 (December 2001): 52-76. 14. ^ http://www.heritage.org/Research/UrbanIssues/bg1721.cfm 15. ^ Achs, Nicole. "Roadblocks to public transit: for reasons ranging from prejudice to pragmatism, many suburbanites are fighting tooth and nail to keep mass transit out of their neighborhoods." American City & County 106, no. 1 (January 1991): 28-32. 16. ^ a b Needle et. al., 1997: 10â??13 17. ^ http://www.publictransportation.org/reports/asp/pub_benefits.asp [edit] Bibliography * Needle, Jerome A.; Transportation Security Board and Cobb, Renée M. (1997). Improving Transit Security. Transportation Security Board. ISBN 0309060133. http://books.google.com/books?id=WfBt0kzz524C. * Newman, Peter; Jeffrey R. Kenworthy (1999). Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence. Island Press. ISBN 1559636602. * Ovenden, Mark (2007). Transit Maps of the World. London: Penguin. pp. 7. ISBN 0-14-311265-5. * Hess, D. 2007. What is a clean bus? Object conflicts in the greening of urban transit. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 3(1):45-58. http://ejournal.nbii.org/archives/vol3iss1/0608-027.hess.html * Valderrama, A. & Beltran, I. 2007.Diesel versus compressed natural gas in Transmilenio-Bogotá: innovation, precaution, and distribution of risk. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 3(1):59-67. http://ejournal.nbii.org/archives/vol3iss1/0608-025.valderrama.html [edit] External links Search Wikimedia Commons Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Public transport * International Association of Public Transport * European Local Transport Information Service [hide] v â?¢ d â?¢ e Public transport Bus Bus rapid transit · Express bus service · Guided bus · Open top bus · Paratransit · Public light bus · Tour bus service · Transit bus · Trolleybus Rail Cable railway · Commuter rail · Heavy rail · Heritage railway · Heritage streetcar · High-speed rail · Inter-city rail · Interurban · Light rail · Maglev · Medium-capacity rail transport system · Monorail · People mover · Personal rapid transit · Rapid transit · Regional rail · Rubber-tyred metro · Tram · Tram-train Other road transport Auto rickshaw · Boda-boda · Bicycle sharing · Carsharing · Cycle rickshaw · Hackney carriage · Horsecar · Horse-drawn vehicle · Motorcycle taxi · Rickshaw · Share taxi · Slugging · Taxicab · Vehicle for hire Ship Cable ferry · Ferry · Hovercraft · Hydrofoil · Ocean liner · Water taxi Locations Bus bulb · Bus garage · Bus lane · Bus stand · Bus station · Bus stop · Bus terminus · Bus turnout · Hub · Interchange station · Kassel kerb · Layover · Metro station · Park and ride · Queue jump · Taxicab stand · Train station · Tram stop · Transit mall Revenue/fares Bus advertising · Contract of carriage · Dead mileage · Farebox recovery ratio · Free travel pass · Manual fare collection · Money train · Proof-of-payment · Ticket machine · Transit pass · Zero-fare public transport Scheduling Public transport timetable · On-time performance Other Boarding · Destination sign · Exit fare · Hail and ride · Public transport security · Request stop · Rollsign · Transit police Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport" Categories: Public transport | Sustainable transport | Transportation planning | Transportation
Buzz Lightyear Member	Wed Nov 04 10:56:07 TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!TOINFINITY,ANDBEYOND!
Sarcasm Member	Wed Nov 04 11:08:29 "If you are happy to accept strikes disrupting your ability to travel several times a year then sure" man, you are so. full. of. bull. shit. Transport strike once every 30 years or blue moon in most european countries or enormous traffic build ups and hours every day waiting in steamy hot or freezing cars, so uncomfortable that its even created a condition called "road rage" which often is lethal? Yeah, lets see, I don't think we've ever even had a transport strike over here - ever - so, my choice is pretty fucking easy.
Nimatzo Member	Wed Nov 04 11:08:55 That is the dumbest thing, public transportation is mainly an urban issue and the USA certainly doea not lack big metropolitan areas. That is where you build your public transportation, that is wherr EVERYONE builds it, just that in Europe we can go the extra mile and connect cities as well.
Aeros Member	Wed Nov 04 11:58:19 The truck is having high speed inter-city trains, and then each city having its own light rail and bus network.
xyz1 Member	Wed Nov 04 12:07:24 Rail accounts for a miniscule 0.56% of all passenger transportation in the US. IIRC, a recent independent audit determines that Amtrak posts of a net loss of $30 for every passenger that boards a train. It's simply an unsustainable system, and not worth it given the fact that it doesn't even account for anywhere close to 1% of transportation in the country.
xyz1 Member	Wed Nov 04 12:10:54 Sources for my claims: http://en....in_the_United_States#Passenger http://www.businessinsider.com/report-amtrak-loss-comes-to-32-per-passenger-2009-10
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 12:13:57 xyz1: That is kind of like saying that tractors are shit for farmwork because a mini gets stuck in the mud. The reason Amtrak makes a loss is because it doesn't operate a high speed service. The average speed of one of thier highspeed trains is 80 miles an hour, because of the layout of their network, the frequency of stops, and the state of the track and trains. If it's shit, then people won't use it (they will fly if they need speed, take a greyhound bus if they can't afford to fly, or drive if they want flexibility). People travel by train because it is faster than road (and can often have reduced journey times centre to centre compared to flying) and cheaper or more convenient than flying. Amtrak do not provide a service that meets these requirements, and that is why they can not get the revenue. If you had a network that was actually laid out properly with appropriate track and train, then you would probably get a much higher percentage of passenger transportation. After all, flying sucks as a passenger experience compared to intercity trains european style.
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 12:17:35 Also, there is plenty of evidence that efficient intercity trains generate passenger hours rather than compete for it. It is not viable to commute from one city to another by plane, car or coach, but it is viable to commute from one city to another by high speed rail.
xyz1 Member	Wed Nov 04 12:24:38 "Amtrak do not provide a service that meets these requirements, and that is why they can not get the revenue." I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle. Acela has the potential to operate at around ~125 MPH; a reform of current government rail speed limitations could increase the train's speed even if no stops were eliminated. Acela is one of the few Amtrak services that makes any money. Even at its current "slow" speed it is making profit. This is not the problem. Unfortunately a large part of the reason Acela is profitable is by price gouging (the average ticket from Philadelphia to Boston is over $200), so they are really cutting down the price advantage in comparison to flight. The main problem is that the Acela "success" really cannot be repeated anywhere else in the country. Acela was done in the Northeast for a reason; that is the densest area of the US, population wise. An Acela clone in any other region wouldn't gain nearly as much traffic and would be unprofitable even with inflated ticket prices.
licker Sports Mod	Wed Nov 04 12:34:33 "Transport strike once every 30 years or blue moon in most european countries or enormous traffic build ups and hours every day waiting in steamy hot or freezing cars, so uncomfortable that its even created a condition called "road rage" which often is lethal? Yeah, lets see, I don't think we've ever even had a transport strike over here - ever - so, my choice is pretty fucking easy. " I am talking about France, where they certainly strike more than once every 30 years. Go fuck yourself retard. "You know public transport isn't "instead" of cars?" Of course, you know that in the western US the population density is tiny and most people are used to driving on open roads without worrying about parking? My only point is that outside of the large cities there is no practical way to make PT effective or efficient currently, and on top of that, no one really wants to pay for it because no one really wants to use it. While I may be all for more PT it's just not going to happen in the Western US, and I would imagine most of the rest of the US outside of the northeastern seaboard. You do realize just how fucking big the US is right? "It is not viable to commute from one city to another by plane, car or coach, but it is viable to commute from one city to another by high speed rail. " Sure, but you still have to change the culture here away from cars. I really do not think you understand exactly what you are asking the US population to do, even if it would be a good thing if they did it.
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 13:37:42 xyz1: Acela isn't really a high speed service... Operating at 125mph isn't the same, because the train has to start from standstil, accelerate to the operating speed, then decelerate to stop at the next station. The distancce between stops and the time taken for this procedure then gives you the average speed. *average* speed is 80mph whereas the average speed of a TGV is 170 mph. Average means start to stop time divided by distance. Lets put that in perspective for a second: in the sense that matters most, the highest speed passenger train service in the US is LESS THAN HALF that of a "European" one. Even decrepit British intercity rail is faster. Is it any wonder then that you lose almost all of the competetive edge? It has little to do with population density and everything to do with the type of trains, the frequency of stops (you do not want to operate a high speed train with a stop every thirty miles obviously... you never have time to accelerate to the operating speed) and the quality of the line (you can't bomb though an urban area in a train at 350Mph). You guys are totally confusing the economics of a light comuter rail way, which needs relatively high population density with that of intercity trains, which are much more like airports. Indeed, high population density can work against high speed trains. licker: "Of course, you know that in the western US the population density is tiny" City to city doesn't depend on average population density, it depends on local population density separated by long distances. Much like airports... even in the Western US this is plenty high enough (though I concede there is an enormous gap in the western coast... 500miles or so without a stop between california and the next big population centre, which might seriously screw the economics, on the other hand a non-stop trip of 500mph could potentially take only an hour and a half with a TGV style line. San Diego - LA - San Jose - Sacramento... "and most people are used to driving on open roads without worrying about parking?" Twas a time when they were used to horses too... If you look at the TGV figures, passeneger numbers just keep rising... fast trains do not just cater to existing transport demands, they create new demands and new modes of behaviour. "Sure, but you still have to change the culture here away from cars." Not really... if you look up some stats, consider car ownership in France is 45 cars and taxis per square km compared to twenty in the US, and per 1000 capita 430 to 514 (1997 I think). Intercity trains don't really directly compete with cars, and in the sense that they do they are pretty damned good. And they can be combined with a car culture with car wagons. For this you need higher city separation than in most of Europe, which is exactly the situation in the US. It's not asking for a shift in behaviour, rather if you put it in place, people change all by themselves.
Average American Member	Wed Nov 04 13:47:00 Change is dangerous. I want everything to be just like when I was a kid with not a worry in the world.
Average European Member	Wed Nov 04 14:05:48 Change, for it's own sake, is wonderful. I do not want anything to be like it was when I was a kid, I want sharia courts, I don't want to marry/have kids and I want to surrender our national sovereignty to the EU.
Average American Member	Wed Nov 04 14:22:17 You are a filthy traitor. Why, I have half a mind to take you out back and shoot you, ragilover.
licker Sports Mod	Wed Nov 04 14:24:20 "City to city doesn't depend on average population density, it depends on local population density separated by long distances." If you look at california you may get a workable system, but if you include the rocky mountain states I'm pretty sure you'll realize your efficiencies are going to be horrible. The US, especially the western US is a commuter culture based around the individual vehicle. You have to find a way to change this identity, and the 'if you build it they will come' strategy is great, but how the hell do you 'build it' if no one wants to pay for it up front? Also the geography is rather problematic as well, damn those mountains! Europe doesn't have anything remotely close to this kind of an issue, as by comparison the Alps and Pyrenees take up a tiny fraction of the land, and even then (as far as the Pyrenees are concerned) PT is not really an option either. "on the other hand a non-stop trip of 500mph could potentially take only an hour and a half with a TGV style line. " Less for a plane, though the hassle at airports takes some time as well. And of course the connections by air are already well established and require no external infrastructure to maintain as opposed to rail lines through the wilderness. "Twas a time when they were used to horses too..." Not a good analogy. A car is simply an iron horse (though the indians used this term for trains), available to the individual. "Not really... if you look up some stats, consider car ownership in France is 45 cars and taxis per square km compared to twenty in the US, and per 1000 capita 430 to 514 (1997 I think). " I think this highlights my point, more cars per person spread over a greater area. But mostly I live in the mountainous west and understand the car mentality most people have. I actually agree with you though, I'd be ecstatic if PT were more available, and I think TGVs are great, just that I do not see the economic or cultural will to incorporate them in this part of the US. "Intercity trains don't really directly compete with cars, and in the sense that they do they are pretty damned good. And they can be combined with a car culture with car wagons. " Ehh? No, you do not understand car culture then. It's not about driving around downtowns in traffic, it's about the intercity open road freedom aspect. Something missing in europe because, well, the roads are not as open, nor free (talking equivalents to interstates, because if you take surface roads, fuck, you're lucky to average 40km/h).
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 14:59:16 licker: "The US, especially the western US is a commuter culture based around the individual vehicle." Well it would be, in the absense of any alternative, just as France was prior to the TGV. Car journeys haven't dropped in france as TGV journeys increased... France retains a car culture. Yeah, I wouldn't build a TGV through the rocky mountain states, but eyeballing, I'd say that the northern part has reasonable city sizes and would probably get an economic boost in the long run by greater integration between urban areas. There is a big North/South gap though that would require serious technical details to talk about. "Less for a plane" More of a hastle, generally more costly (though this depends on the length of the line etc.)
licker Sports Mod	Wed Nov 04 15:08:01 "France retains a car culture. " If so, it is far different from the car culture in the US. Highlighted by anytime I talk to friends or family in France about going anywhere they balk if the drive would take more than a couple hours. Here if the drive doesn't take more than a couple hours it's probably not worth going... My brother in law lives ~70km from his parents, yet rarely (relative to what I would do in the same situation) sees them because it's too far to drive (and there's no convenient PT either). 70km is a joke to any westerner in the US, hell I know people who drive 100 miles one way every day for work. Now personally I think that's insane, but that's the culture.
Seb Member	Wed Nov 04 15:08:24 "Not a good analogy." Yeah, but I am not sure yours is either... it's trains v planes, not trains v cars. "I think this highlights my point, more cars per person spread over a greater area." But if your point really held, then the car density in france ought to be compensated for by the trains, and it isn't. The differencce in car ownership isn't that huge, and the density remains high evven though by rights all those people owning cars in high density areas should be traveling far more through public transport. " Something missing in europe because..." I think you are forgetting where the motorway was invented... Germanys Autobahn network is one of the longest per capita in the world (no speed limits nor tolls). Car culture I would have thought is the idea of being able to go where you like when you like. But who in their right mind would prefer to drive 200 miles to a destination at about half the speed of getting their on a train and probably less cost too?
licker Sports Mod	Wed Nov 04 15:10:41 "the density remains high evven though by rights all those people owning cars in high density areas should be traveling far more through public transport." At which point I don't think it's useful to talk just ownership, but rather how much the vehicles are used, and for what purposes. "But who in their right mind would prefer to drive 200 miles to a destination at about half the speed of getting their on a train and probably less cost too? " Many people here would. As I said, the culture is about being in the car and making the trip, not about getting anywhere in particular.
Aeros Member	Wed Nov 04 17:27:39 I live in an area that desperately needs good train service. The North-eastern Corridor from Richmond to Boston is the most densely populated region in the United States. Its even denser then many parts of Europe. The traffic is an abomination. There is no Rush hour here. Just times when traffic is faster then the usual crawl.
Aeros Member	Wed Nov 04 17:28:28 If there were trains that worked like they do in Europe, you can bet people would use them. But there are not. Stop lying with statistics xyz1.
Formerly Fred Member	Wed Nov 04 19:42:36 Philly should be leveled and rebuilt. It's an ancient filthy fucking shit hole and the traffic is always ridiculous.
Camaban Moderator	Wed Nov 04 19:58:03 I live a 10 min drive away from the nearest bus stop. Pisses me off, as my annual car registration costs would pay for my annual bus tickets. Let alone maintenance and petrol.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: